Mercy Chinwo vs EeZee Tee: EFCC backs odwn as contract dispute takes center stage

In a significant development at the Federal High Court in Ikoyi, Lagos, on Friday, 24th January, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) withdrew its warrant of arrest against Ezekiel Onyedikachi, popularly known as EeZee Tee, the former record label boss of gospel artist Mercy Chinwo.

The withdrawal follows a contentious legal battle between Mercy Chinwo and EeZee, stemming from financial disputes under a 50/50 gross revenue-sharing agreement. EeZee Concepts, the record label, alleged that it had paid Chinwo $625,000, an amount central to their disagreement.

During Friday’s proceedings, Justice Alexander Owoeye, presiding over the case, did not make any direct pronouncements regarding the financial dispute. However, after a thorough review of the facts, the EFCC, represented by its lead counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, formally requested the withdrawal of the arrest warrant.

EeZee’s counsel, Onyekachi Ubani, argued that the EFCC had overstepped its bounds in obtaining the initial arrest order. He emphasized that the issue at hand was a contractual dispute rather than a criminal matter.

Ubani also informed the court that his client had filed a fundamental human rights enforcement suit in another court to halt his arrest and had lodged a preliminary objection to the charges against him.

READ ALSO: Breaking: Former FCT minister Useni, dies at 82

Speaking to newsmen at the court, one of EeZee Tee’s legal counsel, Barrister Maxwell Opara, said, “EFCC approached the court stating that our client evaded service and ran away from arrest. Based on that fact, the court granted an order that our client should be arrested.

Upon receiving that information, we filed the necessary papers asking the court to set aside the order. We also put in motion a challenge to the arraignment of our client because this is a purely civil matter regulated by contract, and the said contract has not been invalidated or declared as an instrument of fraud before EFCC stepped in.”

“We came this morning only for them to tell the court that they had just been served and needed time to respond. In the interest of justice, the court granted their application, which we did not object to.

The court also made a consequential order directing that they should not pursue our client because we have filed our papers before the court and notified them of the nature of the matter, which they complied with.”